By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
HoloDust on 11 September 2018
Edit Thread
Runa216 said:
HoloDust said:

Get of your high horse Runa, nobody gives a rats ass about your holier than thou attitude.
You obviosuly have no clue about Witcher lore, so instead of trying to "educate" people with your rhetorics, go learn something about it.

And once again:

Sapkowski never said anything about wether he agrees on Ciri's casting in the show. He is not consultant on the show.
Ciri is portrayed in books as white, false Ciri is portrayed as white as well.

 

Sapkowski, May 2017:

“I’m thrilled that Netflix will be doing an adaptation of my stories, staying true to the source material and the themes that I have spent over thirty years writing.”

 

Sapkowski, January 2018:

“I do not take part in the work on the series. Books are books, games are games, and film adaptations are film adaptations.” That’s all I can say at the moment. I have signed a contract under which I am punished if I say something more.”

 

Hissrich, May 2018:

The answer is: I will not deviate from the books’ races and cultures, which means I WILL include minorities. The trap people fall into is equating “minority” with skin color.

Will I move through the book and start changing people’s cultural heritage or ethnic makeup or gender because I’m feeling really “liberal” that day? No. That’s ridiculous and contrary to what ANY writer would do, because we are storytellers. Story comes first.

But will there be minorities? Yes. A man would be a minority in Brokilon Forest. A person of color would be a minority in a small village. An islander would be an minority in Cintra. Mr. Sapkowski has said — publicly, and to me — that the Continent is big and diverse — in its population, in every way (race, culture, gender, and yes, occasionally skin color, which he said he did not always specify). I’m not sure how people insinuate I’m destroying the books by recognizing that. I’m honoring the author’s own intentions. He told me so himself.

Thanks! You just provided multiple quotes that actually help me out. 

Who says that the 'minorities' within the world of The Witcher can't be shown as non-white for the sake of this adaptation. For, as you even wrote and quoted, Story comes first. If you think the color of the skin is more important than the themes and story being told, then that's on you. 

So I won't 'get off my high horse' because I'm not claiming to be superior. I'm right, and I won't apologize for that, but I'm not going to act like that makes me better than you. Knowing that I'm right doesn't make me arrogant or ignorant unless I simply think I'm right while being wrong, and that's not the case. I'm right both from a logical and moral standpoint, and while you could ARGUE that it would be better to keep the characters white because that's how you feel and that's how they've been portrayed in the past, I have given plenty of reasons why a studio could reasonably change that up, citing prior examples of races being swapped and it working out fine, as well as historical context as to why it might not be so bad even if it is just taking a role away from a white woman. 

If you chose to disregard my many points and the reasons I stand by my stance, that's fine, but don't pretend that I'm wrong becuase you're offended by the choice to do something you wouldn't personally have done. You have your reasons and that's fine, but it doesn't make you right. My arguments are far stronger and even the quotes you chose to present actually support my side as much - if not more - than yours. 

No, you are not right, you have an opinion, which you're trying to shove down people's throat from your high horse, and as I said, I don't give rats ass about any of that.
You even think that quotes help you...oh dear, your distortion field is just hilarious.

All I gathered so far about you is just showing how ignorant you are about Witcher lore and how much forced diversity is important to you.